Object
New Local Plan: Spatial Options Document 2021
Representation ID: 41162
Received: 21/09/2021
Respondent: Justin Green
Number of people: 2
We understand the need for more housing. However, it is clear from the idea's presented that the those of whom who have created these plans clearly do not live in or around Hullbridge and we disagree with this vision.
Hullbridge is a village and it should remain so. We moved from Wickford due to over building and increased traffic. You can rarely get in or out of Wickford without getting stuck in traffic. The same is now happening in Hullbridge.
Funny how land is deemed as greenbelt unless the council want to use it or they are approached by developers with large cheque books. Green belt should remain green belt, we need these areas to do what mother nature intended: Keep the air clean, and to be used as a place to go for mental and physical health benefits. Area's marked for potential development should be used as green space or recreational use would contribute to a healthier way of living and mind set.
Upon moving to Hullbridge 2 years ago the construction of the new estate at the junction of watery lane caused chaos, over one hour at its best to do a 20 min journey to work.
The sink hole earlier this year brought Hullbridge, Hockley & Rayleigh and surrounding areas to a standstill for most of the day for the whole week the road was closed for, and the construction works of the new roundabout going on at the junction of Rawreth Lane and Hullbridge road did not help, and these works are still incomplete.
Watery Lane, Lower Road are used daily as a go through road to Rochford / Rayleigh and A130, Watery Lane is in much need of attention, with poor drainage, over grown hedgerows and lighting, is closed every month for minimum 1 day and yet no visible signs of any works being carried out, without the usual winter closures due to flooding. Hullbridge just doesn't have the scope or infrastructure to cope with any additional vehicles. How about making improvements to roads like this first, along with other roads in Hullbridge that are in desperate need of attention.
The new infrastructure, recently added to the area only just accommodates the local traffic as it is, without a further 7000 homes, potentially 14000 cars based on 2 car households.
You also need to consider the air quality and the impact on pollution these 14000 cars will create, with more traffic jams creating more pollution, and seeing as the pollution tests carried at the junction of Ferry Road to Lower Road & Hullbridge road that were conducted 3-4 years ago, with the results showing the highest pollution rate in the area due the basin like dip in the road.
Some will say Electric Cars would ease this issue, however as the land needs to be excavated to find the lithium in the first place, it is a false economy and will / does have diminishing consequences to already struggling natural wildlife habitats. Then there is the disposal of the batteries when they are at the end of their life, where will these go? along with other rubbish, that we all take to Rayleigh tip for disposal if it were to close as per the proposed closure to make way for more housing. Dispensing of Rayleigh tip will only encourage more fly tipping.
River development?? The River crouch can only be used during high tides, it is not like the Thames as it does not actually go anywhere only to a dead end, and a little stream. Therefore, any kind of "river ferry shuttle service" is restrictive and unreliable. It is likely that the houses along the river front won't even exist in 20-30 years' time, due to climate change, and rising water levels, as they are highlighted as being in the flood plain path / area. Essex is already sinking at a rate 0.4 > 0.7mm per year, so any further development on such highlighted areas would be an environmental disaster and is not to be considered. These should be protected.
There is also the problem of limited schooling & medical facilities, of which is barely adequate for the village residents as things stand, We need to improve these facilities now, for existing ageing residential population who do not need employment, but do need health services, and for the younger generation who need improvements in primary school places within the community to help alleviate / minimise the use of cars to transport their children to & from schools as this currently is not the case, in a bid to reduce air pollution and congestion, and making the area a cleaner & safer place to live.
Our services would certainly struggle with any extra demand. With Ferry Road being the main road in and out of the village, it will be impossible to increase the road infrastructure to accommodate the unreasonable proposition of this housing expansion and transport connectivity demand. Many are working from home now, but what about when all return to the office / place of work? I don't believe this has been taken in to consideration.
We understand the need for more housing. However, it is clear from the idea's presented that the those of whom who have created these plans clearly do not live in or around Hullbridge and we disagree with this vision.
Hullbridge is a village and it should remain so. We moved from Wickford due to over building and increased traffic. You can rarely get in or out of Wickford without getting stuck in traffic. The same is now happening in Hullbridge.
Funny how land is deemed as greenbelt unless the council want to use it or they are approached by developers with large cheque books. Green belt should remain green belt, we need these areas to do what mother nature intended: Keep the air clean, and to be used as a place to go for mental and physical health benefits. Area's marked for potential development should be used as green space or recreational use would contribute to a healthier way of living and mind set.
Upon moving to Hullbridge 2 years ago the construction of the new estate at the junction of watery lane caused chaos, over one hour at its best to do a 20 min journey to work.
The sink hole earlier this year brought Hullbridge, Hockley & Rayleigh and surrounding areas to a standstill for most of the day for the whole week the road was closed for, and the construction works of the new roundabout going on at the junction of Rawreth Lane and Hullbridge road did not help, and these works are still incomplete.
Watery Lane, Lower Road are used daily as a go through road to Rochford / Rayleigh and A130, Watery Lane is in much need of attention, with poor drainage, over grown hedgerows and lighting, is closed every month for minimum 1 day and yet no visible signs of any works being carried out, without the usual winter closures due to flooding. Hullbridge just doesn't have the scope or infrastructure to cope with any additional vehicles. How about making improvements to roads like this first, along with other roads in Hullbridge that are in desperate need of attention.
The new infrastructure, recently added to the area only just accommodates the local traffic as it is, without a further 7000 homes, potentially 14000 cars based on 2 car households.
You also need to consider the air quality and the impact on pollution these 14000 cars will create, with more traffic jams creating more pollution, and seeing as the pollution tests carried at the junction of Ferry Road to Lower Road & Hullbridge road that were conducted 3-4 years ago, with the results showing the highest pollution rate in the area due the basin like dip in the road.
Some will say Electric Cars would ease this issue, however as the land needs to be excavated to find the lithium in the first place, it is a false economy and will / does have diminishing consequences to already struggling natural wildlife habitats. Then there is the disposal of the batteries when they are at the end of their life, where will these go? along with other rubbish, that we all take to Rayleigh tip for disposal if it were to close as per the proposed closure to make way for more housing. Dispensing of Rayleigh tip will only encourage more fly tipping.
River development?? The River crouch can only be used during high tides, it is not like the Thames as it does not actually go anywhere only to a dead end, and a little stream. Therefore, any kind of "river ferry shuttle service" is restrictive and unreliable. It is likely that the houses along the river front won't even exist in 20-30 years' time, due to climate change, and rising water levels, as they are highlighted as being in the flood plain path / area. Essex is already sinking at a rate 0.4 > 0.7mm per year, so any further development on such highlighted areas would be an environmental disaster and is not to be considered. These should be protected.
There is also the problem of limited schooling & medical facilities, of which is barely adequate for the village residents as things stand, We need to improve these facilities now, for existing ageing residential population who do not need employment, but do need health services, and for the younger generation who need improvements in primary school places within the community to help alleviate / minimise the use of cars to transport their children to & from schools as this currently is not the case, in a bid to reduce air pollution and congestion, and making the area a cleaner & safer place to live.
Our services would certainly struggle with any extra demand. With Ferry Road being the main road in and out of the village, it will be impossible to increase the road infrastructure to accommodate the unreasonable proposition of this housing expansion and transport connectivity demand. Many are working from home now, but what about when all return to the office / place of work? I don't believe this has been taken in to consideration.
Our preferred site would be 3b Southend North.